User blog:AgentHoxton/Quality Time w/ Agent - Wrong Battles and the Appropriate Reaction
TL;DR version: I bascially explain my stance on "Wrong" battles on this wiki and how to optimally approach reacting to them. ---- At some point or another, we will experience a battle we don't agree with or we think are "wrong". There are plenty of battles like that - and which ones they are vary depending on the person. However, lately I've seen people being way too malicious about the whole situation, so here I am to explain the most suitable and most sensible way to go about this. What defines a "Wrong" battle? Basically, a "wrong" battle on the wiki is where the outcome is not believable, mostly due to either research - or a lack of it - or the reasons provided on the page itself. Sometimes it's purposeful for bias for/against a character, sometimes it's missing things out, and sometimes it's just plain accidental. But basically it will be classed "wrong" if the general consensus agree that it is that. Either the writer of said battle will agree and rewrite it, or stand by their decision. But of course, it varies depending on the person. How NOT to approach it Basically, go ballistic if you want people to think you're a malicious jerkass. Seriously, now. Calling the people who made those fights "idiots" will only sound good to you. But in all honesty, this will make you no better than them. All it will do it make you look like an asshole, and eventually it will leave a black smudge on your otherwise good name. So unless you want to be known like that, I suggest you don't go this route. Another way to not do it is to harass the writer of the battle. Telling the writer what they missed out or got wrong is a "maybe" to convince them to change the battle, but honestly, treating them like garbage is a definite "no" to convince them to change it. And again, all it will accomplish by the end of the day is making people assume that you are an asshole who likes to pick away fights you don't agree with solely to namedrop and call people idiots. And I doubt anyone here would want that inflicted on themselves. I know I don't. The optimal method to approach it Keep it civil. I understand it may be difficult depending on which fight you don't agree with, but keep rational about it when translating it into words. What you think and what you say can be interpreted as two very different things in practice, and depending on what you say outright, it will either help you or make matters worse. Usually the latter. And if it's massive disagreement where it may descend into rant territory, I highly advise keeping it to yourself (or if you feel the need to write about it, keep it off the wiki). Debates should be kept privately between the writer and the person disagreeing where possible. My Final Thoughts Basically, it's fine if you have a problem with a fight or if you think it's wrong, so long as it's respectful. Calling people biased when they're not, or simply just calling people "idiots" is not going to help your cause. It's only going to paint you as a prick and it's not going to make you any better than them. It's fine if you disagree on a massive scale, too, but for the love of god keep it to yourself. The last thing we need is more conflict on this wiki than we already have at the moment. Category:Blog posts